(before I start, I must disclose that I own a XBOX360 and Wii)

Now today on the spur of the moment I decided to go out and buy a 60" plasma TV. Now while I was discussing with the sales person the TV, I also told him I wanted to buy a BLU-RAY player, and told him I would consider paying a little more for the PS3 (and had convinced my GF that i could buy it).

5 minutes later he had convinced me that I shouldn't buy the PS3. He first started by telling me that originally the PS3 was good value, but since the launch, Blu-ray players had dropped in price and that the PS3 no longer represented value.

Secondly as I told him I had a 7.2 channel sound system (Sony brand) he told me that the PS3 didn't support it(DOH) and obviously I would not get the benefit out of the sound system.

Luckily for Sony, he did convince me to buy the Sony Blu-ray player over the Samsung ( due to load speeds) and I negotiated the price for the player. To my amazement the SONY blu-ray player was AUD$300 and the PS3 was AUD$668 but if I brought the PS3 I would also need to buy the remote for another AUD$49.00.

In a way I now feel MS was right in not putting a Blu-ray player into the XBOX, as it has given me options.

On a side note, I paid for the Plasma and Blu-ray player, then found out I cant get them until tomorrow :( as the warehouse had closed.

hmm... was he a 360 fanboy xD j/k

But seriously, I would have got the PS3...

You should never ever walk into a store without knowing exactly what you intend on buying.

Doing otherwise is like putting a notice on your back that says, "Attention all sales people!  Please rip me off!"

The PS3 is one of the best blu ray players out there.

I'm not sure if he is correct about the PS3 not supporting 7.2, but then again I haven't done a lot of research on the audio end of HD movies as I can't afford a good surround sound system!

Note:

Blu-Ray wouldn't have gone anywhere if it wasn't for the PS3.  You wouldn't have been buying a Blu-Ray player if Sony hadn't included a Blu-Ray drive in the PS3.  So you are kind of arguing a chicken before the egg kind of conundrum.

I disagree.  Blu-ray always had the advantage over HD-DVD do to the Sony studios.

At worst it would of took longer. (And prices would be cheaper.)

Damn that salesman! He obviously cant afford a ps3 himself

The only bad thing about the PS3 as a standalone is the lack of IR capability. You cant use a uni remote on it. Personally I dont care. The more remotes you have the bigger of a man you are :) The Blu ray remote for the PS3 is ok.

Blu-Ray standalone sales were anemic though.  Blu-Ray disc sales beating HD-DVD week after week (every week in 2007) are what allowed Blu-Ray to maintain its foothold, and that wouldn't have been possible without the PS3.  Standalone Blu-Ray price players were pretty high, and Toshiba was willing to take a loss on its players to be competitive.

Studio support can change at the drop of a hat.  Fox was very close to switching to HD-DVD at one point, and only decided not to because Sony threw some money at them.

It would have been a very different game if the PS3 had not included Blu-Ray.  I would have put my money on HD-DVD.

HDMI only supports upto 7.1 channels, so for any thing with more channels you need the optical connection (which the PS3 doesnt have).

That said, Im not happy with the fact that the blu-ray player he sold me doesnt talk about 7.2 in the manual, although it does have an optical and coaxial cable.

***

Now this is my fanboy rant: Interesting enough I can buy a Blu-ray player and and XBOX360 pro bundle (2 games, some offer 3)with games and still have $50-$70 change, where as a year ago it would have been $400AUD more!